1. (C) SUMMARY: Beginning July 31, two prominentconservative websites posted articles calling for a boycotton U.S. consumer goods and services, ranging from fast-foodfranchises to shampoo brands, to begin on August 4. Therewas already an ongoing cellular telephone text messagingcampaign. The potential effectiveness of the boycott hasbeen widely debated on the websites. This call for a boycottis the first in Saudi Arabia on U.S. products since the 2003Iraq invasion, and follows a 2005 successful boycott onDanish products. The Saudi economy is too dependent on U.S.consumer goods for the boycott to be popular amongst theSaudi populace, but its initiation may suggest the Saudipublic's increasing displeasure with the U.S.'s foreignpolicy towards the Lebanon crisis. END SUMMARY.

2. (U) On July 31, the conservative website "Islam Online"posted an article reporting an SMS cell phone text messagingcampaign calling for the boycott of U.S. products to protestperceived U.S. inaction on the Lebanon crisis. The SMS textsused emotional rhetoric to support their campaign. One ofthe messages stated, "with every Riyal (with which) youpurchase American products there is a bullet in the heart ofa Lebanese and a Palestinian." In the article, SalehAl-Rubai'an, Professor of Journalism at the Call and MediaCollege, King Saud University, commented that the boycottwill be an "effective weapon that forces nations to take theIslamic states into consideration." Also, the boycottcampaign urged people to support their local economy, bybuying Saudi products and effectively boycotting Americangoods and services.

3. (U) The conservative Al-Sahat website also posted thisarticle, which generated a robust online debate about theeffectiveness of an anti-U.S. U.S. boycott. One of thesepostings stated, "One would get good credit from God if oneboycotted American and Israeli products as these nations arekilling Muslims, and it is one way of supporting our Muslimbrothers." Another posting commented that boycottingAmerican products had proved difficult in the past andsuggested pursuing a boycott of the U.S. dollar in favor ofthe Yen or Euro.

4. (SBU) On August 4, al-Sahat posted a list of specificU.S. goods and establishments to boycott including: Nesquick,Coca Cola, NIKE Sportswear, Lays Potato Products, Pampers,Proctor & Gamble products, Pert Plus, Head and Shoulders,Pantene, Starbucks Coffee, Pizza Hut, Baskin Robbins,Kentucky Fried Chicken, McDonald's, Hardees and Burger King.PolOff and EconOff visited several restaurants on the list aswell as supermarkets that stock the listed American products.All the establishments were fully stocked with the itemsrecommended to be boycotted. Indeed, many stores were havingfront aisle sales on these items. There were no leafletsposted on the bulletin boards at the entrance of the stores,and there were no indications that the boycott was affectingbusiness. In one Baskin Robbins, the store clerk stated thatbusiness had been normal. (Note: the stores and restaurantsvisited by Emboffs were not located in neighborhoods known tobe extremely conservative, where customers would be morelikely to be influenced by calls for a boycott. End Note).

5. (C) COMMENT: The boycott campaign on U.S. goods andestablishments seems unlikely to be successful for botheconomic and political reasons. Economically, such a boycottwould hurt Saudi businesses, since U.S. consumer outlets andfranchises in the Kingdom rely on the local Saudi economy andmarket for raw materials and supplies. In political terms,this boycott is in contrast to the recent boycott on Danishproducts, since this one remains to date in the domain of theSaudi conservatives and not the mainstream populace.Additionally, the current Saudi mood on the Lebanon crisisremains divided. Nevertheless, this campaign reflects thecontinuing trend of the Saudi public's growing displeasurewith U.S. foreign policy in the region. END COMMENT.OBERWETTER